Timmbits

Timmbits

Lives in Canada Montreal, Canada
Works as a inventor
Joined on Oct 8, 2011
About me:

Deutscher, living in Montreal Canada.
Cycling, chess, design, inventions, nature, photography, are some of the things I like.

Comments

Total: 1489, showing: 1221 – 1240
« First‹ Previous6061626364Next ›Last »
On Best Camera of 2012: And the Winner is... article (1412 comments in total)
In reply to:

HansJN: Not sure what the point of an election like this really is. Has anybody who voted used all those camera's? Or even a small subset?

So these results either represent sales numbers (people voting for the camera they own), fanboyism (people voting for the brand they are invested in), or what people feel is probably a good camera (people voting for review scores) - but one they have never used.

I would have liked to see the Samsung NX series in the voting choices... and of course, like most of you, would have voted for what I own. We make a choice, then keep on justifying our decision after purchase. But I still think I have an awesome mirrorless with my NX20 :D

Direct link | Posted on Jan 1, 2013 at 10:29 UTC
On Best Camera of 2012: And the Winner is... article (1412 comments in total)

in summary:

"Favorite camera of 2012"

Direct link | Posted on Jan 1, 2013 at 10:17 UTC as 392nd comment | 3 replies
On Roundup: Enthusiast Zoom Compact Cameras article (420 comments in total)
In reply to:

Timmbits: In the conclusion: "The Fujifilm X10 is also worth a look for two reasons - its excellent lens, and an EXR sensor which offers the option of incredibly good dynamic range and somewhat better high ISO image quality than its peers. The tradeoff is that you only get these benefits if you're happy to shoot at 6MP, and the way in which the EXR functionality is implemented can be confusing."

That overlooks the third EXR mode at 12MP, and more importantly, overlooks the Advanced "PRO LOW-LIGHT" Night Mode which combines 4 exposures to give great 12MP images.

DPR, could you please confirm that these modes are common to both the XF1 and the X10, just to make sure? Thanks.

With so much emphasis on lens brightness plus sensor size for good low light performance, it might be a test parameter to be added, so as to compare cameras' night scene modes' performance, as they vary immensely from one model to another. Beyond basics, this should be of interest to many.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 31, 2012 at 20:26 UTC
On Roundup: Enthusiast Zoom Compact Cameras article (420 comments in total)

In the conclusion: "The Fujifilm X10 is also worth a look for two reasons - its excellent lens, and an EXR sensor which offers the option of incredibly good dynamic range and somewhat better high ISO image quality than its peers. The tradeoff is that you only get these benefits if you're happy to shoot at 6MP, and the way in which the EXR functionality is implemented can be confusing."

That overlooks the third EXR mode at 12MP, and more importantly, overlooks the Advanced "PRO LOW-LIGHT" Night Mode which combines 4 exposures to give great 12MP images.

DPR, could you please confirm that these modes are common to both the XF1 and the X10, just to make sure? Thanks.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 31, 2012 at 17:03 UTC as 65th comment | 2 replies
On Roundup: Enthusiast Zoom Compact Cameras article (420 comments in total)
In reply to:

Timmbits: @DPR: you're welcome for the idea of the aperture graph! ;-)

I'm referring to, of course, the graph that I made and published here when the RX100 came out.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 31, 2012 at 16:45 UTC
On Roundup: Enthusiast Zoom Compact Cameras article (420 comments in total)
In reply to:

lolopasstrail: Declaring a best all rounder without taking acquisition price into account is delivering only a partial review.

These are consumer products. Toys like this are a major expense for people, and going out on a limb to buy toys they can't afford are a major problem for people.

Let's have a new attribute to include in reviews. Let's call it the price/performance ratio. Take you quality metrics, your imaging ability metrics, and whatever other subjective ingredient to throw into the stew, and divide it by today's actual acquisition price.

And then let us determine the best all-arounder. Is an LX-7 with a ppr (price/performance ratio) of 8.3 better than the Sony with a ppr of 4.8? Or whatever.

Because without real world, practical business attributes shared, this is just soft core spec porn.

That is a rather easy exercise for your to do: can't afford the RX100, get the LX7.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 31, 2012 at 16:41 UTC
On Roundup: Enthusiast Zoom Compact Cameras article (420 comments in total)
In reply to:

Reg Natarajan: Anyone know if the X-F1 has the Advanced Low Light mode of the X10? Not the EXR High ISO mode, but the Advanced Low Light mode that combines multiple images into one final image. That mode is far superior for handheld night time street photography in my experience.

I believe it does. Download the manual and check.
there is EXR Auto (it selects for you according to scene)
exr Resolution Priority (12MP file)
exr High iso & Low Noise (6MP file)
exr D-Range Priority (6MP file)
And under the Advanced menu, you should find
"Pro-Low-Light" where it combines 4 images... but did you say "handheld", for 4 images?

I think this is one thing that DPR might like to include in their reviews: night/low light modes comparison.
Not all cameras' low light modes actually produce acceptable results, while some do a great job. (for example, P7000 was great, XZ1 was horrible)

Direct link | Posted on Dec 31, 2012 at 16:26 UTC
On Roundup: Enthusiast Zoom Compact Cameras article (420 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tinjaw: I know this isn't the best/appropriate place to ask, but please forgive me as I want to get people to answer this that have read this guide.

I have never owned a "real" camera. I don't know how to use one. I have decided to buy the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 as B&H had it for $299 (oddly the white versions was $449).

I am going to buy a book and some online courses to learn how to use it and take photos.

*My Question is* What low cost flash should I purchase that will work with this camera that will be good enough to use while learning? I have no idea what I need/should buy.

You might be interested in National Geographic's book "Complete Photography".

Direct link | Posted on Dec 31, 2012 at 16:22 UTC
On DPReview Recommends: Top 5 Compact Cameras article (560 comments in total)
In reply to:

Timo_T: This is not the first time, that you reviewd the Canon Powershoot,but not its closest competitor the Nikon P7700. Las time, Nikon introduced its P7100 it took more then 6 Month to get the review while the Powershoot Review is finished right after the Market introduction.

Even not the full review of the Nikon P7700 is not finished befor the christmas business. How can you introduce every flagship enthusiast compact camera of every brand, but forget the Nikon.

I would like to know the reasons, I think you are not as indipendent as you try us to tell.

the canon S95, S100, S110 are the ugliest cameras ever made. they are easy to hate.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 31, 2012 at 07:35 UTC
On DPReview Recommends: Top 5 Compact Cameras article (560 comments in total)
In reply to:

Anoldgeezer: Kudos to DPR for its reviews and wealth of information for amateurs like myself.

There is one issue that I believe should be discussed a lot more, and that is the "death" of the optical viewfinder. The manufacturers should seriously consider keeping viewfinders with all their cameras. The LCD's are a farce, way over rated.
I purchased a Sony Cyber Shot DSC-HX9V a while back to go on a 3 week trip the next day. A great camera with one exception...NO VIEW FINDER. I was under the impression that the LCD was able to overcome bright light situations, but how wrong I was. I should have been smart enough to return the camera, but I didn't.

How do you overcome not being able to compose your picture and to see your subject clearly? When the sun is behind you it is impossible to know what you are shooting.

My advice to amateurs like myself who has used a viewfinder for years (I'm 73) is to not buy any camera without a viewfinder or else you will be very frustrated and disappointed .

I agree with oldgeezer. I liked the rudimentary viewfinder on the Nikon P7000 I owned, for backup in sunlight, although I still used the LCD when possible. And our apologies for the not thought through remarks of maboule. however, anoldgeezer, you might want to pay attention to sensor size, and not just if there's a viewfinder, if you care about image quality.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 31, 2012 at 07:34 UTC
On Roundup: Enthusiast Zoom Compact Cameras article (420 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sdaniella: Extra Mp (due to larger sensor area size) does offer more flexible creative crop options, it's more about the relevance of how well particular pixel sizes perform 'like-size-for-like-size'.

There is nothing about the Sony RX-100 that is a 'engineering marvel' at all, when all they do is resort to using slightly larger yr2012-pixels than all the rest, albeit plastered on a large enuf sensor size to ensure more Mp overall

Based strictly on predicting IQ on pixel density (pixels/mm of sensor), larger pixels should perform better than smaller (sensor size and Mp count notwithstanding):

Best to Worst, similar pixel densities, if same*, are truly pitted 'one-on-one'*:
1) RX100 @ 415 pixels/mm
2) FujiFilm X10/XF1 @ 455 pixels/mm
3) Pany LX7 @ 490 pixels/mm
4) Oly XZ-2 @ 533* pixels/mm
4) Nikon P7700 @ 533* pixels/mm
6) Canon G15/S110 @ 538 pixels/mm

If a sensor with SMALLER pixels happen to demonstrate superior IQ to others that are LARGER, then, it's the better pixel (superior tech).

Correction for the XZ2 (not that it changes anything)

3948 x 2976 = 11.7MP / 12.8 total Mpixels
7.44 x 5.58 = 41.5152 mm2
div/12.8 = 3.24 u2

Direct link | Posted on Dec 31, 2012 at 02:33 UTC
On Roundup: Enthusiast Zoom Compact Cameras article (420 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sdaniella: Extra Mp (due to larger sensor area size) does offer more flexible creative crop options, it's more about the relevance of how well particular pixel sizes perform 'like-size-for-like-size'.

There is nothing about the Sony RX-100 that is a 'engineering marvel' at all, when all they do is resort to using slightly larger yr2012-pixels than all the rest, albeit plastered on a large enuf sensor size to ensure more Mp overall

Based strictly on predicting IQ on pixel density (pixels/mm of sensor), larger pixels should perform better than smaller (sensor size and Mp count notwithstanding):

Best to Worst, similar pixel densities, if same*, are truly pitted 'one-on-one'*:
1) RX100 @ 415 pixels/mm
2) FujiFilm X10/XF1 @ 455 pixels/mm
3) Pany LX7 @ 490 pixels/mm
4) Oly XZ-2 @ 533* pixels/mm
4) Nikon P7700 @ 533* pixels/mm
6) Canon G15/S110 @ 538 pixels/mm

If a sensor with SMALLER pixels happen to demonstrate superior IQ to others that are LARGER, then, it's the better pixel (superior tech).

In summary, the Sony, despite more pixels, still has pixels twice the size, and a sensor triple the size as the 1/1.7" sensors.

The Fuji is somewhere in the middle, with larger pixels than most, but not as large as the Sony. The Fujifilm XF1 has pixels 17% smaller than Sony's, and 41% larger than the 1/1.7" lot. It's sensor is almost exactly half the size as Sony's, while 41% larger on average than the smaller sensors.

Assuming you put the best quality optics possible in front of all these sensors, there is no arguing that the larger sensors and larger pixels will arguably produce better tones, nuances, and less dead spots (noise) than the smaller ones.

This gives us 3 sub-categories in this roundup:
Sony, larger sensor, larger pixels
Fuji
Others, smallest sensors, smallest pixels

the rest, is splitting hairs... as other factors will take over - like lenses, firmware, etc.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 31, 2012 at 02:22 UTC
On Roundup: Enthusiast Zoom Compact Cameras article (420 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sdaniella: Extra Mp (due to larger sensor area size) does offer more flexible creative crop options, it's more about the relevance of how well particular pixel sizes perform 'like-size-for-like-size'.

There is nothing about the Sony RX-100 that is a 'engineering marvel' at all, when all they do is resort to using slightly larger yr2012-pixels than all the rest, albeit plastered on a large enuf sensor size to ensure more Mp overall

Based strictly on predicting IQ on pixel density (pixels/mm of sensor), larger pixels should perform better than smaller (sensor size and Mp count notwithstanding):

Best to Worst, similar pixel densities, if same*, are truly pitted 'one-on-one'*:
1) RX100 @ 415 pixels/mm
2) FujiFilm X10/XF1 @ 455 pixels/mm
3) Pany LX7 @ 490 pixels/mm
4) Oly XZ-2 @ 533* pixels/mm
4) Nikon P7700 @ 533* pixels/mm
6) Canon G15/S110 @ 538 pixels/mm

If a sensor with SMALLER pixels happen to demonstrate superior IQ to others that are LARGER, then, it's the better pixel (superior tech).

Oh, and your calculations are wrong. You quote linear units, while we are dealing with surface (square area) units. Let me help:

We have sensor size, square area, divided by total pixels (and not image pixels because many do a crop of the total), giving us a total in micrometers, I assume. As you can see, the RX100's pixels, at 5.8 u2 are almost twice the size as the smaller ones in this roundup, the Nikon at 3.2 u2. Sensor sizes have even larger differences: Sony's sensor at 116.6 is almost triple the size of 1/1.7" sensors.

RX100
5472 x 3648
13.2 x 8.8 = 116.6 mm2
div/20 = 5.8 u2

XF1
4000 x 3000
8.8 x 6.6 = 58.8 mm2
div/12 = 4.8 u2

XZ2
3948 x 2976 = 11.7MP / 12.8 total Mpixels
7.44 x 5.58 = 41.5152 mm2
div/11.7 = 3.5 u2

G15
4000 x 3000
7.44 x 5.58 = 41.5152 mm2
div./12.1 = 3.4 u2

LX7
3468 x 2236 = 10.1MP / 12.7 total Mpixels
7.44 x 5.58 = 41.5152 mm2
div/12.7 = 3.3 u2

Nikon P7700
4000 x 3000 = 12MP / 12.8 total Mpixels
7.44 x 5.58 = 41.5152 mm2
div./12.8 = 3.2 u2

Direct link | Posted on Dec 31, 2012 at 02:13 UTC
On Roundup: Enthusiast Zoom Compact Cameras article (420 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sdaniella: Extra Mp (due to larger sensor area size) does offer more flexible creative crop options, it's more about the relevance of how well particular pixel sizes perform 'like-size-for-like-size'.

There is nothing about the Sony RX-100 that is a 'engineering marvel' at all, when all they do is resort to using slightly larger yr2012-pixels than all the rest, albeit plastered on a large enuf sensor size to ensure more Mp overall

Based strictly on predicting IQ on pixel density (pixels/mm of sensor), larger pixels should perform better than smaller (sensor size and Mp count notwithstanding):

Best to Worst, similar pixel densities, if same*, are truly pitted 'one-on-one'*:
1) RX100 @ 415 pixels/mm
2) FujiFilm X10/XF1 @ 455 pixels/mm
3) Pany LX7 @ 490 pixels/mm
4) Oly XZ-2 @ 533* pixels/mm
4) Nikon P7700 @ 533* pixels/mm
6) Canon G15/S110 @ 538 pixels/mm

If a sensor with SMALLER pixels happen to demonstrate superior IQ to others that are LARGER, then, it's the better pixel (superior tech).

the RX100 is remarkable, in that it sets new records for lens system size: consider the dimensions of the lens system, comparable to the sensor size that it services. consider distance from back of the lens to the sensor, the total volume of .the lens system, and it's just as compact as something servicing a sensor a third. the size.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 31, 2012 at 02:04 UTC
On Roundup: Enthusiast Zoom Compact Cameras article (420 comments in total)
In reply to:

Timmbits: I'm really skeptical at their "conclusions". They seem to have simply "forgotten" that the Samsung has a f1.4 lens, like the LX7. Both of these should have rated better than the S110, and the Samsung been a better alternative to wifi which the canon has.
Also, I find that DPR is confusing EXR mode with Night mode. EXR isn't just "night". A subtle "mistake" to slam the manufacturer and favor another? Either this is going on, or the reviewers aren't paying attention. Pick one. Neither bodes well for an eroding reputation.

@JH... exactly the opposite has been argued time and time again: megapixels don't determine image quality, but sensor size does. they don't make tiny sensors with photosites as large as the ones in a sensor multiple times larger. do the math.
2ndly, if it were only "pro" compacts (btw are you kidding me, "pro"?), we wouldn't see a S110... nor any other tiny sensor compact in this roundup.
In fact, like DPR already outlined for us, everything has to be taken in context... although not pro quality, this is a category, and within which we can find winners as well as obsolescence.
Well, at least you are starting to appreciate how a camera can give you better IQ than your cameraphone.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 31, 2012 at 00:32 UTC
On Roundup: Enthusiast Zoom Compact Cameras article (420 comments in total)
In reply to:

rick01: I've been considering the panasonic fz200 and I'm wondering if the sensor size in it would be smaller due to its larger zoom range then some of these cameras ? And how does the quality of the images compare? I can't seem to compare the images of the Panasonic fz200 to the Sony rx100 or olympus x2 in the full review on the Panasonic.

@Doughbm2: where did you get that information? both have a f2.8 on the wide end. contrary to popular belief, the pana is not f2.8 throughout - leaving out the tele number is just misleading advertising. it's maximum opening is f2.8... and as you go tele, that becomes a smaller proportion of total length, hence the number increases and aperture regresses - it's a mathematical equation - you can't circumvent that.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 31, 2012 at 00:27 UTC
On Roundup: Enthusiast Zoom Compact Cameras article (420 comments in total)
In reply to:

Eugene CH: I noticed that in 99.99% of tests or when a camera is presented, the lens cover is NO shown!!! Why?! For example, for me a major issue is to take the camera in my pocket ready for unexpected street photo. In such case, I need only to pull the camera out, to turn the button "on" and take photo. In case of Panasonic LX7, there is NO integrated lens cover, therefore I have to take out the manual cover, to put it aside, and only after to take photos. Hopefully the manual cover will not be lost! With this example I try to understand why, in 99.99%, no camera is shown with the closed cover, manual or integrated, it would be possible to have already information on how the lens is protected. In our specific case, LX7, needs a manual cover thet is NOT in delivery scope! Eugen-CH

although I get your point, I doubt you'd settle for a bad camera just because it has a cover - otherwise you wouldn't even be reading this section. an elegant solution for you, are those add-on auto-retractable covers.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 31, 2012 at 00:11 UTC
On Dpreview Users' Poll: Best Camera of 2012? article (1511 comments in total)
In reply to:

marike6: IF you going by IQ, AF speed, low-light AF and AF tracking it's no contest between the D800 and EM-5. Anyone who tells you different hasn't used the D800.

I think a lot of people have gotten image quality, size, and price, confused, and all mixed up into one single basket.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 29, 2012 at 21:38 UTC
On Dpreview Users' Poll: Best Camera of 2012? article (1511 comments in total)
In reply to:

RJM400: I suspect the Nikon D800/E may well be the better camera overall. I don't know and don't really care. I went out on a night shoot with a pro who used the 800 and, in my lowly opinion, I was more than pleased with how my images compared!

I am using the OM-D E-M5 camera and having so much fun.

For what I paid for the OM-D, grip, and top lenses it is about what the Nikon 800 body alone costs! (For near comparable results as far as I'm concerned)

I love the portability and whole OM-D system.

I'm so glad I didn't become a Nikon or Canon lemming.

I guess you are making a good case for APS-C mirrorless then. If MFT is good enough for a discerning FF user, than APS-C will be more than good enough. I was using a NX1000 and just purchased a NX20, and the more I read, the more I am happy with my decision.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 29, 2012 at 21:34 UTC
On Dpreview Users' Poll: Best Camera of 2012? article (1511 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kristiyan: Fitting FF sensor in a compact pocket-size camera - Sony RX1 - a turnstone in 2012!

If I could afford it, I would buy it. Some can. Don't think Sony didn't do their market research on this before design, price, and launch. My "poor man's RX1" is a Samsung NX1000 with a 30mm F2 lens, and it is quite nice to have something, like in the old days of 35mm film cameras, you just carried one lens for casual photography.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 29, 2012 at 21:30 UTC
Total: 1489, showing: 1221 – 1240
« First‹ Previous6061626364Next ›Last »